PDA

View Full Version : Wired: Forecast Cloudy for Windows Vista


mummey
08-16-2005, 06:30 PM
>>Link<< (http://www.wired.com/news/infostructure/0,1377,68514,00.html?tw=rss.TOP)

Microsoft spent significant marketing dollars last month to announce that it will call its next-generation operating system Windows Vista. But what's in store for users? Wired News procured a beta 1 sample of Vista to see if there was anything to get excited about.

What we found were a lot of attractive graphical interfaces and new search-engine functions, but, so far, not too much in the way of productivity or security enhancements. Microsoft promises more features in the upcoming beta 2 version, and the release version is scheduled to go on sale next year.



More in the article guys... be sure to read it before posting, else you might end up looking pretty stupid... ;)

-b

Recursive
08-16-2005, 06:42 PM
Yeah, better wait untill closer to release before saying anything.

Mudvin
08-16-2005, 08:57 PM
Geez, if only Stive will release his MacOS X for all the PC's, not only native Apple assembled....windows then would get _very_ serious competitor.

Beamtracer
08-16-2005, 10:18 PM
"not too much in the way of productivity or security enhancements."

Not much for security? I thought that was the whole idea of it. I thought that was what was taking them so long to get this OS released.

Maybe it's all the eye-candy that's been taking most of the development effort.

DotPainter
08-16-2005, 10:18 PM
This sucks.......


Quote:

How will Windows Vista accommodate 64-bit applications?

In addition to a 32-bit version, Microsoft says it will offer 64-bit versions of the operating system, sold separately or preinstalled on new 64-bit PCs and servers in the second half of 2006. But it will be a long while before a 64-bit system is needed to run modern applications.

EndQuote

I thought Longhorn, now Vista was to be 64bit from the start, in all versions..... The whole idea of someone needing another version of Vista kinda makes it seem like the first
release of Vista won't really be useful for me at all. How many flavors will this OS come in, Pro/Home/64, and what is the real difference? I cant see why they would continue this policy of making separate versions of the same OS. On top of that, it doesn't make sense for the article to say that it will be a long while before a 64-bit system is needed, when quite a few of the x86 processors sold now are 64bit and even more will be at the time of Vista's releaset. Strange....

richcz3
08-16-2005, 10:53 PM
Nothing against Microsoft. If I ever consider Vista it will be at least two years after its release. Unless there some absolute compelling software/hardware break through that makes Vista essential, XP Pro and XP64 will be more than solid enough to handle my current needs.

I just don't care for all the eye candy and increased overhead that comes with a new OS.

CGmonkey
08-16-2005, 11:05 PM
Come OOOON people, it's not a public release, it's not ment to accommodate the home users. It's ment for the developers.

Are we moving back in the evolution hierarchy? Is it to much technology for the current man to be able to comprehend? Is it just me or are we just babbling alot of bullshit lately?

Hazdaz
08-17-2005, 02:38 AM
I find the "Meh" reaction toward Vista to be kind of funny....

Here is a new verion of Windows that (seemingly or atleast hopefully) does exactly what alot of us have been asking for, for quite some time - make the OS more stable, more secure, and just plain more solid. I can care less about transparent buttons and stuff like that - I am sure to be turning all that stuff off when I finally get Vista - but since Vista is based on Windows Server 2003 (and not regular XP), it will hopefully be a better OS to run.

I honestly don't want new fluff "features", but since it seems that Vista doesn't have too many, people's interest seems to be lagging when infact Vista at it's core (probably) deserves alot more interest.

mummey
08-17-2005, 03:01 AM
I find the "Meh" reaction toward Vista to be kind of funny....

Here is a new verion of Windows that (seemingly or atleast hopefully) does exactly what alot of us have been asking for, for quite some time - make the OS more stable, more secure, and just plain more solid. I can care less about transparent buttons and stuff like that - I am sure to be turning all that stuff off when I finally get Vista - but since Vista is based on Windows Server 2003 (and not regular XP), it will hopefully be a better OS to run.

I honestly don't want new fluff "features", but since it seems that Vista doesn't have too many, people's interest seems to be lagging when infact Vista at it's core (probably) deserves alot more interest.

Heh, someone didn't read the article, or is just trying to ignore what it said. ;)

Hazdaz
08-17-2005, 03:13 AM
Heh, someone didn't read the article, or is just trying to ignore what it said. ;)
umm, wrong.. I did read the article, and also other articles on Vista that went farther indepth on it's underlieing technology.

mummey
08-17-2005, 03:15 AM
umm, wrong.. I did read the article, and also other articles on Vista that went farther indepth on it's underlieing technology.

They why did this article focus on the fact that there wasn't anything new for security and that it seemed to focus on eye-candy?

Hazdaz
08-17-2005, 03:47 AM
Good question.
... but this article paints a completely different picture (based on Beta 1):
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,1840730,00.asp

Specifically being:
"The early version of Beta 1 we tested shows a focus on the basic structure of the operating system—in particular, a lot of changes to the things that users don't think about that often but that turn out to be very important."

With a similiar preview in this article also:
http://reviews.cnet.com/Microsoft_Windows_Vista/4505-3672_7-31456587-2.html?tag=top

Seems to me like Vista fixes/improves alot of the underlieing technology withing the OS - something that isn't "sexy" or easily marketted, but more important to me than any of the transparent OS X knock-off stuff that they added.... that is why I find it funny that Vista isn't gettting alot of the attention it probably deserves.

Beamtracer
08-17-2005, 04:21 AM
[/i]With a similiar preview in this article also:
http://reviews.cnet.com/Microsoft_Windows_Vista/4505-3672_7-31456587-2.html?tag=top

Seems to me like Vista fixes/improves alot of the underlieing technology withing the OS - something that isn't "sexy" or easily marketted, but more important to me than any of the transparent OS X knock-off stuff that they added.... that is why I find it funny that Vista isn't gettting alot of the attention it probably deserves.


Well, according to that Cnet article you posted, these new features are rip-offs from competitors, such as Linux and OS X. Maybe that's why it's hard to market these features as anything new...

From the article:

"In Windows Vista, Microsoft borrows a lot of clever ideas from its competitors.

Borrowing from Linux, Windows Vista runs all users at a Standard user level and creates a separate Administrator login, so even if you are the only user of the OS, you will still need to log in with Administrator privileges to do high-level work, such as changing the status of hidden or read-only files. Standard users should still be able to install and uninstall applications, provided they know the password for Administrator privileges. This extra effort should minimize the occurrence of spyware installing without your knowledge and remote-access exploits from taking control of your computer.

Borrowing from Apple Mac Tiger OS 10.4, Windows Vista incorporates enhanced desktop search features throughout its new OS. You can search from the Windows Start menu or within applications, and you can also search within the new version of Internet Explorer 7. Also borrowing from Apple, Windows Vista does away with traditional file folders and allows you to "stack" related documents together. These virtual files can exist independent of where the actual file resides on the hard drive."

The line "Microsoft borrows..." probably wouldn't work too well in advertising.

DotPainter
08-17-2005, 04:27 AM
I personally think that Microsoft is juggling many pieces of what was to be longhorn and still making decisions on what will and will not be included. Some of it may be due to technical complexity and what can be done on time. Either way, with the phased release of the Betas and sketchy information on most other aspects of the OS, it doesn't seem that Vista is a well defined product enough yet to start printing out the full page ads and detailed documentation just yet.

Another issue may be that some of these inner workings may be more controversial and cause people to NOT want Vista that much more. The digital rights management system is one obvious one, but there are others. There is supposedly a new feature to load often used programs into memory for faster loading..... Ummmmmm, wellll I kinda dont see where I would WANT that but.... Another feature is the redesign of how programs are installed/uninstalled to reduce the trash that gets left in a computer's registry and other nooks and crannies over time, which actually probably is useful. To many people, MSs idea of improving the inner workings also equates with a bloated OS.

Who knows? It will be interesting to see comes out when MS starts updating the MSDN with more detailed information on APIs and low level system services, in addition to providing more detailed brochures on the new features of the OS on the Vista home page.

evilbob
08-17-2005, 06:40 AM
The article is as pointless as it is uninformative, written from the perspective of someone looking for polish and end-user 'goodies' in a developer build. Next he'll write an article complaining about how Hot Pockets are "disappointing, not hot at all, but frozen and wrapped in plastic."

BillSpradlin
08-17-2005, 06:56 AM
I'm going to invest in Kleenex because from the looks of this thread, a whole lot of people could use some.

Shape-Shifter
08-17-2005, 09:48 AM
The bottom line is, Windows is a Dos based system, and it uses agressive multi-tasking, in other words, it wont allow other programs to get a processor share. Mac OS X and Linux are Unix Based os's and they use co-operative mult-tasking, meaning that they share the processor equally. Why bother paying hundreds for another "agressive" operating system when you can download Linux for free (like free beer, the good kind of free, not like free out of a box on the curb with who knows what) Linux already has all the features that vista has, almost 3 years ago. except the system resource hogging stuff of course. windows definitely has the largest support for applications now, but linux works fine with maya for me, and it's a big break from all the headaches you get with windows. I made the conversion about two weeks ago, and i'm never looking back

open source is the future!!!

spacefrog
08-17-2005, 01:18 PM
The bottom line is, Windows is a Dos based system, and it uses agressive multi-tasking, in other words, it wont allow other programs to get a processor share. Mac OS X and Linux are Unix Based os's and they use co-operative mult-tasking, meaning that they share the processor equally. Why bother paying hundreds for another "agressive" operating system when you can download Linux for free (like free beer, the good kind of free, not like free out of a box on the curb with who knows what) Linux already has all the features that vista has, almost 3 years ago. except the system resource hogging stuff of course. windows definitely has the largest support for applications now, but linux works fine with maya for me, and it's a big break from all the headaches you get with windows. I made the conversion about two weeks ago, and i'm never looking back

open source is the future!!!

sorry - but are you sure you know about the things you are talking about ?
you should learn a lot more about win-internals before posting such statements.

For vista:
there are a few new technologies invisible to the common end-user packed into this OS.
I ´do NOT say anybody needs them - i'm more than happy with the things we have with XP now. (except systemdesign-quirks they are in there - of course) But articles that critize the lack of "FRESHNESS" of this release only judging the interface and toys should not be taken serious.

StephanD
08-17-2005, 01:45 PM
I don't care what OS I'm running,all I care about is speed and security...oh and speed too.

Most people love MSWindows at first glance and hate it later,

Most people hate Linux/BSD at first glance but love it later,

Most people love Osx at first glance and still do years later,


Wouldn't it be nice for the consumers to be able to choose any of them regradless of hardware and softwares?ah,maybe one day.

AmbiDextrose
08-17-2005, 02:17 PM
The bottom line is, Windows is a Dos based system, and it uses agressive multi-tasking, in other words, it wont allow other programs to get a processor share.

But Windows NT/2000/XP/Vista is based on VMS which is a true multi-threaded O/S. In turn, VMS was based on one of the first versions on Unix. VMS was written by DEC seven years after AT&T's (Bell Labs) first implementation of Unix. A year later, Unix was ported to the DEC Vax and for the next eight years (1986), ran exclusively on the DEC Vax.

You really should investigate your facts. Otherwise, you end up looking like a fool.

Thalaxis
08-17-2005, 03:32 PM
They why did this article focus on the fact that there wasn't anything new for security and that it seemed to focus on eye-candy?

Are you sure you actually read it?

Thalaxis
08-17-2005, 03:53 PM
But Windows NT/2000/XP/Vista is based on VMS which is a true multi-threaded O/S. In turn, VMS was based on one of the first versions on Unix. VMS was written by DEC seven years after AT&T's (Bell Labs) first implementation of Unix. A year later, Unix was ported to the DEC Vax and for the next eight years (1986), ran exclusively on the DEC Vax.

You really should investigate your facts. Otherwise, you end up looking like a fool.

You probably should also, since the first AT&T UNIX system was built on an un-used DEC VAX machine that originally ran VMS.
VMS history (http://www.webmythology.com/VAXhistory.htm)

mummey
08-17-2005, 04:25 PM
Are you sure you actually read it?

Funny. :rolleyes:

What about security?

The beta 1 version of Windows Vista essentially offers the same security functions that Windows XP Service Pack 2 offers.

Thalaxis
08-17-2005, 05:53 PM
Funny. :rolleyes:

You obviously need a clue. MS has been talking about back-porting a lot of stuff developed for Vista into XP, and security was among them.

mummey
08-17-2005, 06:28 PM
You obviously need a clue. MS has been talking about back-porting a lot of stuff developed for Vista into XP, and security was among them.

Now now, no need to be making personal 'remarks'. ;) I was only referring to this particular article. I would suppose there's been more than one written about Longhorn/Vista in the past five years... :D

While we keep hearing how they're going to be adding more security to Vista. They have seemed pretty mum on the details. To be honest with all the security companies that they've purchased in the past couple of years, you'd think they would have more than just the spyware checker out by now.

Thalaxis
08-17-2005, 07:09 PM
Now now, no need to be making personal 'remarks'. ;) I was only referring to this particular article. I would suppose there's been more than one written about Longhorn/Vista in the past five years... :D


Well, then stop it with the misinformation. If you don't know, don't make something up.


While we keep hearing how they're going to be adding more security to Vista. They have seemed pretty mum on the details. To be honest with all the security companies that they've purchased in the past couple of years, you'd think they would have more than just the spyware checker out by now.

They've hardly been mum... but they aren't going to talk about technical stuff in public (that's for the development partners), and they've mentioned publicly that the security stuff in Vista was going to go into XP more than once. Just because you haven't seen it doesn't mean it's not there.

mummey
08-17-2005, 07:10 PM
Well, then stop it with the misinformation. If you don't know, don't make something up.

I haven't made anything up, despite your attempts to get me to do so. The only thing I've done is quoted the article. :shrug:

Thalaxis
08-17-2005, 07:16 PM
I haven't made anything up, despite your attempts to get me to do so. The only thing I've done is quoted the article. :shrug:

I'm not trying to get you to do anything.

BigJay
08-17-2005, 07:39 PM
DOS? that got left behind in win98 days (I refuse to believe ME or Santa ever existed) :)

The one thing I loved hearing is that they are doing away with the registry as it is now. The source of so much anguish in my life.

I'll wait to SP2 or 3 of Vista before I spend any money on it. Then again I'll probably wait till the software catches up to take advantage of it.

Hazdaz
08-17-2005, 10:47 PM
Well you can call it 'borrowing' or 'stealing', I call it 'business as usual' - stealing ideas is the name of the game in business. While some of those features might not be original to MS, I would be happy to see them in the next version of Windows none the less.

Well, according to that Cnet article you posted, these new features are rip-offs from competitors, such as Linux and OS X. Maybe that's why it's hard to market these features as anything new...

From the article:
"In Windows Vista, Microsoft borrows a lot of clever ideas from its competitors.

Borrowing from Linux, Windows Vista runs all users at a Standard user level and creates a separate Administrator login, so even if you are the only user of the OS, you will still need to log in with Administrator privileges to do high-level work, such as changing the status of hidden or read-only files. Standard users should still be able to install and uninstall applications, provided they know the password for Administrator privileges. This extra effort should minimize the occurrence of spyware installing without your knowledge and remote-access exploits from taking control of your computer.

Borrowing from Apple Mac Tiger OS 10.4, Windows Vista incorporates enhanced desktop search features throughout its new OS. You can search from the Windows Start menu or within applications, and you can also search within the new version of Internet Explorer 7. Also borrowing from Apple, Windows Vista does away with traditional file folders and allows you to "stack" related documents together. These virtual files can exist independent of where the actual file resides on the hard drive."
The line "Microsoft borrows..." probably wouldn't work too well in advertising.

AmbiDextrose
08-17-2005, 11:08 PM
You probably should also, since the first AT&T UNIX system was built on an un-used DEC VAX machine that originally ran VMS.
VMS history (http://www.webmythology.com/VAXhistory.htm)

Heh. You want facts, eh? Unix was written around 1970 in PDP assembler for the (then 16-bit) PDP-7 and PDP-9 minicomputers by AT&T's Bell Labs. It was then re-written in C in 1972. It wasnt until 1977 when the (32-bit) VAX was developed in order to replace the older PDP machines. It wasn't until the VAX was available that VMS came into existence.

http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/docs/vms_vs_unix.html

You may also want to read this:

http://cm.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/who/dmr/hist.html

I'm old enough to have actually worked on a VAX AND early versions of UNIX and I have more than 16 years of systems engineering and integration experience.

Thalaxis
08-17-2005, 11:25 PM
Heh. You want facts, eh? Unix was written around 1970 in PDP assembler for the (then 16-bit) PDP-7 and PDP-9 minicomputers by AT&T's Bell Labs. It was then re-written in C in 1972. It wasnt until 1977 when the VAX was developed in order to replace the older PDP machines. It wasn't until the VAX was available that VMS came into existence.


It's rather -- and frustrating that I found several references that indicated otherwise... particularly since the reference to an earlier version of VMS was in fact VMS' predecessor.


I'm old enough to have actually worked on a VAX AND early versions of UNIX and I have more than 16 years of systems engineering and integration experience.

I used them also when I was in college... and I can't say that I like VMS much. DEC's UNIX was nice, SGI's was irritating incorrect man pages didn't help).

Beamtracer
08-18-2005, 12:14 AM
Well you can call it 'borrowing' or 'stealing', I call it 'business as usual' - stealing ideas is the name of the game in business. While some of those features might not be original to MS, I would be happy to see them in the next version of Windows none the less.
Hi Hazdaz. No, I didn't say that Microsoft was "borrowing or stealing". It was the news article you posted that said Microsoft "borrowed" ideas from other companies.

I don't think Windows Vista will be released before 2007.

Don't you wonder what's going on up there in Redmond? Back in 2001 they were talking about their upcoming 'Blackcomb' OS, which was supposed to arrive in 2002 but was running late.

Then, as I understand it, to get something out the door, Blackcomb was scrapped, and an "interim" OS called Longhorn was announced to take its place. At a keynote address in 2001, Bill Gates promised that Longhorn would be released in 2003.

2003 came and went. 2004 came and went. 2005 soon gone. 2006 no Longhorn. 2007???

Don't you start to think "what's going on here?". Is something going wrong at Redmond or does this seem normal?

Links:
2001 "Longhorn is an interim release to replace Blackcomb"
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2001/10/24/gates_confirms_windows_longhorn/

2001 "Longhorn to ship in 2003"
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1660250,00.asp

2002 "Microsoft promises Longhorn will be released 2nd half 2004"
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2002/04/18/allchin_confirms_longhorn_delay/

.

mummey
08-18-2005, 12:24 AM
Beam: If it were any company other than Microsoft, I would understand the gripe, but in this case...

They are making a OS version ...wait a minute, scrap that. a new OS period, that has to be able to run on 90% of the world's computers. This is the responsibility MS accepted. I would rather it take them longer for them to finish it and they get it right, than the alternative of rushing it out the door and using the public as its beta-testers.

They're being smart about Vista, for once... ;)

percydaman
08-18-2005, 12:35 AM
ya I have no major issues with the OS Im using, so I could care less if it takes em longer to get it out... Ill just keep on, keeping on....

Hazdaz
08-18-2005, 02:58 AM
BEAMTRACER - I think if you look at things from a business perspective (and not from a computer/programming perspective), you might not think that this is quite that 'strange' really. I mean cancelling one project - even after pouring millions into it - is really not that uncommon (as shocking as that sounds). Companies get so big that they completely lose touch with their customers and where the market is going.

I think the whole changing of directions and this project and that is partly to do with LINUX - yes, I said it! MS might never admit it, and honestly I don't think it was every a "real" threat at all, but I would be willing to bet that the publicity and momentum LINUX got a few years ago really pushed MS into one direction.

Then the whole convergence of PCs with your TV and such might ahve pushed them into another direction. Espesially with the arrival of a whole new market for MS - in the form of the X-Box.

Then the whole 9-11 (I can't believe I am bringing that up, but I am) issue, I do recall Gates himself really pushing hard on making sure his software was much more secure and stable from theoretical terrorist attack. Add in the 'wants' and 'demands' from groups like the RIAA to secure their "precious" music and movies.

All these things take time and money to develop - and some of them run counter to other ones (like a convergence of PC with TV to play movies and music through, could possibly cause groups like RIAA to complain that their data is too accessable and not secure enough).

Also the whole Operating System business is really mature (with nearly no competition) - so no matter what, they have to come up with something - anything - new to keep the cash coming in.

Thalaxis
08-18-2005, 03:30 AM
BEAMTRACER - I think if you look at things from a business perspective (and not from a computer/programming perspective), you might not think that this is quite that 'strange' really. I mean cancelling one project - even after pouring millions into it - is really not that uncommon (as shocking as that sounds). Companies get so big that they completely lose touch with their customers and where the market is going.


MS has been there... and has found out the hard way that they're not powerful enough to tell their customers what they want on a number of occasions now.


I think the whole changing of directions and this project and that is partly to do with LINUX - yes, I said it! MS might never admit it, and honestly I don't think it was every a "real" threat at all, but I would be willing to bet that the publicity and momentum LINUX got a few years ago really pushed MS into one direction.


That depends on how you define "threat." Linux poses no threat whatsoever to MS' desktop market right now, but MS has to grow and continue selling their OS and their other software. One of the markets MS wants very much to get into is larger servers, but most of the server buyers these days are asking for Linux. So in that sense, Linux IS a threat.

And while Linux doesn't stand a chance on the desktop now, anyone care to take bets on whether or not that will change? It's not like Linux isn't improving or something.


Then the whole 9-11 (I can't believe I am bringing that up, but I am) issue, I do recall Gates himself really pushing hard on making sure his software was much more secure and stable from theoretical terrorist attack. Add in the 'wants' and 'demands' from groups like the RIAA to secure their "precious" music and movies.


One side effect of that nightmare was a huge focus on infosec... and MS got a $90 million contract for infosec solutions. The US DoD would be toast wtihout MS, which probably had a lot to do with it... but they do take security seriously.


Also the whole Operating System business is really mature (with nearly no competition) - so no matter what, they have to come up with something - anything - new to keep the cash coming in.

Which leads to Vista's biggest competitor: Windows XP. The second biggest one is probably Windows98. Linux is a distant third, and OSX isn't even farther behind that as far as threats go.

And then there's the part about how late to the party Apple was with an OS that had protected memory and pre-emptive multitasking... Rhapsody was right around 7 years late.

MS says Vista will be out in 2006... the first beta is out now, and that puts it on about the same timetable as XPsp2, so it's not out of the question. It might happen. And it might not :)

Beamtracer
08-18-2005, 04:24 AM
I mean cancelling one project - even after pouring millions into it - is really not that uncommon (as shocking as that sounds)
Yes. Apple has done it also. Long ago, they were developing a new OS called Copeland, which was scrapped when Steve Jobs showed up and convinced then CEO Gil Amelio that his OS was better.

And while Linux doesn't stand a chance on the desktop now, anyone care to take bets on whether or not that will change?

At the moment there seems to be a few companies making distributions of Linux, such as Novell and Red Hat, but they are largely disconnected from the desktop world.

I wonder how it would be if a major PC manufacturer like HP, Dell or Gateway or even Lenovo started work on their own flavor of Linux. If they aimed it at the desktop, and bundled in the basic apps that people need, and sold the machine down at Walmart.

If a PC manufacturer made their own Linux, it might be better suited to the desktop customer than Red Hat or the others.

Thalaxis
08-18-2005, 01:03 PM
Yes. Apple has done it also. Long ago, they were developing a new OS called Copeland, which was scrapped when Steve Jobs showed up and convinced then CEO Gil Amelio that his OS was better.


Yup. Pretty much any major OS rewrite is going to take a long time. Add in the plethora of services like those included in DirectX and .NET, the thousands of secondary silly features that don't need to be part of the OS in the first place like the media player, and still provide developer tools and support, and the end result is a monumental task.


At the moment there seems to be a few companies making distributions of Linux, such as Novell and Red Hat, but they are largely disconnected from the desktop world.


And the companies backing them and providing their revenues don't care either, generating a self-reinforcing cycle keeping Linux on the desktop dependent almost entirely on the open-source community.


I wonder how it would be if a major PC manufacturer like HP, Dell or Gateway or even Lenovo started work on their own flavor of Linux. If they aimed it at the desktop, and bundled in the basic apps that people need, and sold the machine down at Walmart.


Lindows. As far as I know, they did pretty well, but they were aimed at a market that would have found the iMac mini to be too expensive, so I wouldn't call it mainstream. But it's a start.


If a PC manufacturer made their own Linux, it might be better suited to the desktop customer than Red Hat or the others.

True, but I don't think it will happen. Most PC manufacturers wouldn't be able to fund it, let alone survive the fallout from MS. I think the best bet going right now for a desktop UNIX suitable for the mainstream is the Apple/Intel alliance.

StephanD
08-18-2005, 01:11 PM
I think Linare too did this but if you go to distro site,you'll find that the linux crowd supports it more or less.

Thalaxis
08-18-2005, 01:40 PM
Blender is a good example of what the open source community can do when there is a guiding hand with a vision helping to keep things focussed. Fortunately, there are some open-source GUI projects for Linux that are heading in that direction, and I have high hopes for them. Their progress so far has been pretty impressive, all things considered.

The open-source community is growing, so I think the future looks good... just not close :)

CGTalk Moderation
08-18-2005, 01:40 PM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.